6 ms·

Possible correlation and hand waving equals causation. I, too, was hoping for something, well, technical. Considering #1 on hacker news...

edgefield0 6y ago
Does anyone else see the irony that hand waving is being disputed with hand waving?
- izacus 6y ago
  No, there's a concept of "burden of proof" which applies here.
- platelets2020 6y ago
  You don't get to stack "hand waving" indefinitely. The person who made the original claim is responsible for providing refutable evidence.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  I was reading through the comments and hoping someone would know what keystone actually was and if there was any possibility of the claim in the article :) . I mean there's a lot of stuff in chrome other than this keystone thing, maybe it was one of those other things.
politelemon 6y ago
That this is so high right now is quite reflective of HN. It's nearly an exact match of the meme like utterance often seen on reddit: "chrome bad".
- platelets2020 6y ago
  There's been a massive influx of reddit-quality comments for quite a while. I guess it was only a matter of time before it was reflected in the submissions.
- Avtomatk 6y ago
  I think that in HN there is a high quality in the comments and a low quality in the voting of publications, because in the first, people refrain from commenting stupid things because it gets them harsh criticism, but in the second, people can vote for stupid (or low quality) publications because they will not be criticized. And most of HN (and of social media, and the world in general) is dominated by dumb people.
- dang 6y ago
  If you're going to credit the community with the problem I trust you'll credit it with the solution as well. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25402000 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25402000
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  So are you also going to point out that the vast majority of other top links are actually quite credible? It's easy to declare a whole site bad over one thing isn't it? Like the author in this article did under similar circumstances?
wnevets 6y ago
Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days, I'm not surprised to see this so highly voted. I also wouldn't be surprised if most of the upvotes are based on the title/domain rather than the actual "content".
- coldtea 6y ago
  >Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days Well, why shouldn't it be?
  - wnevets 6y ago
    Why shouldn't apple? For some reason apple gets a pass on HN for things like fighting to keep forced labor camps open [1]. Lets hate Google AND Apple. 1. https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple...
    - boogies 6y ago
      Seriously, why not? And why was wnevets getting downvoted? The linked article references a source I’m sure most on HN would agree is reputable, to the extent it confirms their biases. > A report in [The Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-uighur/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-u...) claims that Apple is trying to weaken provisions in the bill. > > Apple lobbyists are trying to weaken a bill aimed at preventing forced labor in China, according to two congressional staffers familiar with the matter, highlighting the clash between its business imperatives and its official stance on human rights.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - coldtea 6y ago
        Yeah, just bad reporting. "Apple lobbyists are trying to weaken a bill aimed at preventing forced labor in China, according to two congressional staffers familiar with the matter, highlighting the clash between its business imperatives and its official stance on human rights." 1) The US legislators could not care less about "forced labor" in China (or even in the US for that matter, e.g. penal labor). Same way they don't care when it is their allies doing it (or worse things). It's all about the trade and dominance war with China. 2) Apple and the other companies involved don't care about forced labor either (if they could legally and without media repurcusion use it, they would). But they also don't need and don't seek forced labor. Good old capitalist low wage labor is good enough for them. So it's not like they try to defend China's forced labor because they benefit for it. 3) What Apple and the other companies have is multiple suppliers all over China, including that area. Most of them (if not all) have little or nothing to do with forced labor. But because the law aims to hurt China and not to stop forced labor, it doesn't care about little details, but uses blunt force and a wide net. 4) Understandingly (from a business/logistics perspective) Apple, Google, and co, can't just drop/replace suppliers at the drop of a hat. So they ask for more time for check, and a better look at which suppliers are actually problematic to be added to the bill. So "weaken the provisions" is actually "make the law more accurate and fairer", but they won't say that. Then the mix of propaganda for foreign policy (as if those legislators care), hypocrisy, business interests (from Apple and co) and extremely bad reporting for clickbait and patriotic reasons, then turns into: "Apple lobbies in favor of force labor". It's as if some companies wanted to continue to use some useful drug medically, and e.g. tried to "weaken the provisions" of an strict anti-drug law that forbade it without nuance, and the headlines were like "Company X lobbies in favor of heroin".

edgefield0 6y ago

Does anyone else see the irony that hand waving is being disputed with hand waving?

izacus 6y ago
No, there's a concept of "burden of proof" which applies here.
platelets2020 6y ago
You don't get to stack "hand waving" indefinitely. The person who made the original claim is responsible for providing refutable evidence.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
I was reading through the comments and hoping someone would know what keystone actually was and if there was any possibility of the claim in the article :) . I mean there's a lot of stuff in chrome other than this keystone thing, maybe it was one of those other things.

politelemon 6y ago

That this is so high right now is quite reflective of HN. It's nearly an exact match of the meme like utterance often seen on reddit: "chrome bad".

platelets2020 6y ago
There's been a massive influx of reddit-quality comments for quite a while. I guess it was only a matter of time before it was reflected in the submissions.
Avtomatk 6y ago
I think that in HN there is a high quality in the comments and a low quality in the voting of publications, because in the first, people refrain from commenting stupid things because it gets them harsh criticism, but in the second, people can vote for stupid (or low quality) publications because they will not be criticized. And most of HN (and of social media, and the world in general) is dominated by dumb people.
dang 6y ago
If you're going to credit the community with the problem I trust you'll credit it with the solution as well. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25402000 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25402000
stjohnswarts 6y ago
So are you also going to point out that the vast majority of other top links are actually quite credible? It's easy to declare a whole site bad over one thing isn't it? Like the author in this article did under similar circumstances?

wnevets 6y ago

Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days, I'm not surprised to see this so highly voted. I also wouldn't be surprised if most of the upvotes are based on the title/domain rather than the actual "content".

coldtea 6y ago
>Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days Well, why shouldn't it be?
- wnevets 6y ago
  Why shouldn't apple? For some reason apple gets a pass on HN for things like fighting to keep forced labor camps open [1]. Lets hate Google AND Apple. 1. https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple...
  - boogies 6y ago
    Seriously, why not? And why was wnevets getting downvoted? The linked article references a source I’m sure most on HN would agree is reputable, to the extent it confirms their biases. > A report in [The Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-uighur/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-u...) claims that Apple is trying to weaken provisions in the bill. > > Apple lobbyists are trying to weaken a bill aimed at preventing forced labor in China, according to two congressional staffers familiar with the matter, highlighting the clash between its business imperatives and its official stance on human rights.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - coldtea 6y ago
      Yeah, just bad reporting. "Apple lobbyists are trying to weaken a bill aimed at preventing forced labor in China, according to two congressional staffers familiar with the matter, highlighting the clash between its business imperatives and its official stance on human rights." 1) The US legislators could not care less about "forced labor" in China (or even in the US for that matter, e.g. penal labor). Same way they don't care when it is their allies doing it (or worse things). It's all about the trade and dominance war with China. 2) Apple and the other companies involved don't care about forced labor either (if they could legally and without media repurcusion use it, they would). But they also don't need and don't seek forced labor. Good old capitalist low wage labor is good enough for them. So it's not like they try to defend China's forced labor because they benefit for it. 3) What Apple and the other companies have is multiple suppliers all over China, including that area. Most of them (if not all) have little or nothing to do with forced labor. But because the law aims to hurt China and not to stop forced labor, it doesn't care about little details, but uses blunt force and a wide net. 4) Understandingly (from a business/logistics perspective) Apple, Google, and co, can't just drop/replace suppliers at the drop of a hat. So they ask for more time for check, and a better look at which suppliers are actually problematic to be added to the bill. So "weaken the provisions" is actually "make the law more accurate and fairer", but they won't say that. Then the mix of propaganda for foreign policy (as if those legislators care), hypocrisy, business interests (from Apple and co) and extremely bad reporting for clickbait and patriotic reasons, then turns into: "Apple lobbies in favor of force labor". It's as if some companies wanted to continue to use some useful drug medically, and e.g. tried to "weaken the provisions" of an strict anti-drug law that forbade it without nuance, and the headlines were like "Company X lobbies in favor of heroin".